About us
..................................................................................
13 January 2009
BOBBY WAYNE BOOKOUT remarked
29 Oct 08 when he signed up for a Y-DNA kit:
Let me say a word about my missing
link . My ggrandfather ( William Elvis Bookout )'s Mother was
Suzanna Bookout.
Suzanna d/o -- John Bookout & Sarah Vaughn -- John s/o -Charles B & N
Cagle
Charles s/o - Joseph 1. I have found no record of William E.' s
Father -- While I was growing up
there were lots of questions and rumors among the family.
One rumor was that William E was sired by a Bookout man in the
community ??
Now we had no record of Suzanna's marriage. When Wayne's test
results came back they showed that he had an exact match at 37
markers to an Unknown Beaty, born in Fentress Co., TN.
We also had a record that Wayne's ggrandfather William Elvis Bookout
was born in 1843/2 in Fentress Co., TN.
Emails were sent to Wayne's many Beaty matches, and among many
welcoming replies we received on 10 Jan 09 the following from Earl
Beaty:
Yes, Wayne, you certainly fit the profile of a Beatty/Beattie/Beaty. The
full story
is a long one and I will try to keep the message short. We can work
on the
details later.
An important fact of the Beatty situation is that about 70% of the
Beattys
tested have DNA results which indicate that they have a common
ancestor who
lived since surnames have been in use. We call this ancestor Adam (no
connection with the Biblical Adam). We have compelling evidence that
Adam
lived before 1600 AD and after 1200 AD. The location is not certain
but we
are working on the hypothesis that he lived in Scotland near the
western end
of the border with England. Actually we have pretty good reason to
believe
that Adam lived in a valley called Eskdale. Conclusions derived from
these
DNA results always have some uncertainty just because of the statistical
nature of the mutations. There is very little uncertainty that Adam
was real
and the ancestor of the large number of Beattys we call Family Group
01. I
think it very likely that you are a descendant of Adam, and therefore
the
other members of Group 01 are your cousins.
I have entered the haplotype of Adam into Ysearch as record 7GX6B. At 37
markers you have 3 mismatches. In the time since Adam we expect a few
mutations and 3 is not a large number. But there is another twist to the
plot. The mismatches are at DYS 389-2 and the two CDY markers. We
have many
descendants of Adam who share your 31 value at 389-2. This is a
rather rare
value and we conclude that this group is the result of a mutation since
Adam, but still rather far in the past. We call the first Beatty to
receive
this mutation "Charlton", and his descendants are the Charlton
Branch. The
men in the Charlton branch tend to have elevated values at CDY and
you match
exactly 3 of them at 37 markers. Put another way your 37-marker
haplotype
exactly matches Charlton's. This means that you are almost certainly a
descendant of Charlton as well as Adam.
When and where Charlton lived is not clear. Many of his descendants
are in
what we call Lineage-2. These lineages are based on paper-trail
genealogy,
and the results are available at :
http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~bp2000/main.htm . BP2000 is a
Beatty
research cooperative, and the lineage numbers are well past 500. L-2 is
mainly Tennessee Beatys and most of them are in the Charlton Branch.
Further
research has divided L-2 into 6 branches and I hope someone will
offer to
help you determine which you are in. Information on the DNA Project is
available at www.BeattyDNA.org. Our best guess
is that Charlton lived in Ireland before 1700.
We have an unusually talented and helpful batch of Beattys. I put
most of my time into one aspect or another of the DNA analysis.
Others are
skilled at working the libraries and archives.
I hope you are pleased at the prospect that you had a Beatty ancestor.
--Earl
Wayne's memory was ignited, and he wrote 11 Jan 09:
I have no doubt now that my gggrandfather was a Beaty from our
testing. I have remembered . . . my aunt Viola Conley told me years
ago that my Great Aunt Sarah Bookout /Conley-- D/o -William Elvis ,
told her that William Elvis was sired by a Beaty or Beatty as she
spelled it . Wow its something that information can be found after so
many years.
So Wayne's test has given him a gggrandfather, an immigrant
ancestor, and a line of Beaty/Beattie forefathers in Scotland. He is
soundly a Bookout and has a Beaty affiliation as well.
.............................................................................................................
Our fourth test, that of Jed Gentry Bookout, proves that Joseph Bookout 2 is the brother of John and Marmaduke,, most probably with Joseph 1 as their most recent common ancestor.
David W. Brown, our veteran mentor, astutely observed on 11 Dec 2008:
There are a couple things to note in comparing the closely matching results of Jed Gentry Bookout (>Joseph 2), Marvid David Bookout (>John), and Henry Wade Bookout (>Marmaduke).
First, you have now established the entire 37 marker Y-DNA Haplotype of Joseph Sr. It turns out that Jed still carries the same 37, while Henry and Marvin have one mutation each somewhere in your lines.
That is clear because at each and every marker descendants of at least two different sons of Joseph 1 match perfectly. The descendant that always matches one or the other of the two is Jed
At some point in Henry's line down from Marmaduke, Loci CDYb mutated from 39 to 40.
Likewise, at some point in Marvin's line down from John, Loci DYS 447 mutated from 25 to 24.
We have no idea in what generation it happened, BUT:
This means that any Bookout in the future that has 40 at CDYb must be descended from Marmaduke.
Also, any Bookout in the future that has 24 at DYS 447 is descended from John.
Further, however, a Bookout may STILL test 39 at Loci CDYb and be from Marmaduke. This is because we do not know where in the line of descent from Marmaduke the change from 39 to 40 occurred.
And further, a Bookout may STILL test 25 at Loci DYS 447 and be from John. This is because we
do not know where in the line of descent from John the change from 25 to 24 occurred.
(Very extensive tests along the lines of John and Marmaduke could identify where these changes occurred. This point is only made to suggest a description of the process of change; it is not meant to suggest something that would be either practical or useful.)
Three tests are in. The tests of these individuals have paper trails to Charles, John, and Marmaduke Bookout, respectively. It is probable that their common ancestor is Joseph 1 Bookout, c 1735, of Prince George's Co., MD or of Loudoun Co, VA Joseph 1, but this is not a proven fact.
The tests show that all three individuals are located on the same, late, west European "branch" of the Human Family Tree. Their "branch" (or "Haplogroup") is indicated by the technical name "R1b1b2," which originated about 25,000 years ago.
From top left, on the top horizontal row of the reports are listed 37 "markers."
A "marker" is a particular location (locus) or place on the Y-DNA chromosome.
(Recall that the "Y" chromosome determines whether an individual is a man ("XY") or a woman ("XX").
On the top horizontal row the "markers" are called by their technical names, D(NA) "Y"(-chromosome) S(egment)s or DYS#s. These "Segments" or "markers" have shown by experimentation to be significant in characterizing a person's Y-DNA. For example the first DYS# is 393. Arbitrary, but no more so than we would say, Route 58, which pins down a particular road in Riverhead, NY.
The "numbers" under the "markers"--in the 2nd horizontal row of results--indicate how one individual's Y-DNA differs from another person's Y-DNA at a particular "marker."
The "numbers" refer to "alternatives" (alleles) in how many times a sequence of certain chemicals known as A, T, C, and G are "repeated" in a particular D(NA) "Y"(-chromosome) S(equence), DYS.
For each DYS# a unique number of "repeats"--S(hort) T(andem) R(epeats) or STRs--is copied from father to son back for many generations.
It's like telling one kind of a General from another by the number of "stars" on the shoulder of his uniform.
Note for example, for individuals #2 and #3 whose tests are in, "marker"/DYS# 447 (18th from left) has, respectively, "repeats" of 24 (for individual #2) and then 25 "repeats" (for individual #3):
#1, CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC (24 repeats)
#2, CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC (25 repeats)
This may seem very picky, but it indicates a unit of 1 G(enetic) D(istance) between individuals #2 and #3.
For the same #2 and #3 individuals there is only one more "marker" (DYS# CDY b--35th from left) that displays "alternatives" (alleles) or "repeats" of 30 (for individual #2). and alternatively 40 times (for individual #3):
#2, GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG (39 repeats)
#3, GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG (40 repeats)
This is the 2nd, and last, difference between the 37 "markers" of individuals #2 and #3.
The "repeats" for all the other "markers" are the same for these two individuals.
Thus individuals #2 and #3 are said to have a G(enetic) D(istance), GD, of 2 on their 37
"marker" tests because a total of 2 "markers"/DYS#s 447 and CDYb exhibit "alternative" numbers (alleles) of "repeats" (STRs).
A G(enetic) D(istance) of only 2 on a 37 marker test for 2 individuals with the same surname indicates that STATISTICALLY there is a 99% chance that they have a COMMON ANCESTOR.
It is very important to note that this probability does not PROVE that Joseph 1, of either MD or VA, is their common ancestor. The paper trail is what suggests that. NC Joseph 1 left paper documentation as their common ancestor by naming them in his will.
Now, for practice, in the test results of individual #1, count the number of "repeats" that are different* on the exact same "markers" as individuals #2 and #3.
The differences between the "repeats" of #1 from those of #2 and #3 indicate that--in spite of the fact that #1 has a reliable paper trail leading to the same common ancestor as #2 and #3-- it is STATISTICALLY very improbable that #1 had a common ancestor with #2 and #3 in recordable genealogical time. (If you go all the way back everybody has a common ancestor.)
Individual #1 has the surname Bookout and is a valued member of the Project by adding genetic diversity and by posing a question that the Project needs to answer. Furthermore, " , , , [I]f one has been a part of a particular family’s history and heritage, who are we to deny the reality of that family engagement or who are we to say that the geneticists have it wrong? . . . . [We are] no less interested in those with non-matching DNA who have documentation back to a common ancestor than . . . . in those who have documentation and DNA matching . , , , All these persons are familial descendants and, as individually identified, may or may not be genetic descendants of the common ancestor. And that is OK." **
Once a Bookout, always a Bookout, it doesn't matter whose "jeans" you wear.
_______________________________________________
*Answer: 17
**Donald G. Dickason, "Familial and Genetic Descendancy; Conflict or Complement? A Coonsideration of Seemingly Contradictory Genealogical Conclusions When Comparing Traditional Documentaion and the Results of DNA Testing" (5/10/05), see http://www.isogg.org/fgd.htm.
13 January 2009
BOBBY WAYNE BOOKOUT remarked
29 Oct 08 when he signed up for a Y-DNA kit:
Let me say a word about my missing
link . My ggrandfather ( William Elvis Bookout )'s Mother was
Suzanna Bookout.
Suzanna d/o -- John Bookout & Sarah Vaughn -- John s/o -Charles B & N
Cagle
Charles s/o - Joseph 1. I have found no record of William E.' s
Father -- While I was growing up
there were lots of questions and rumors among the family.
One rumor was that William E was sired by a Bookout man in the
community ??
Now we had no record of Suzanna's marriage. When Wayne's test
results came back they showed that he had an exact match at 37
markers to an Unknown Beaty, born in Fentress Co., TN.
We also had a record that Wayne's ggrandfather William Elvis Bookout
was born in 1843/2 in Fentress Co., TN.
Emails were sent to Wayne's many Beaty matches, and among many
welcoming replies we received on 10 Jan 09 the following from Earl
Beaty:
Yes, Wayne, you certainly fit the profile of a Beatty/Beattie/Beaty. The
full story
is a long one and I will try to keep the message short. We can work
on the
details later.
An important fact of the Beatty situation is that about 70% of the
Beattys
tested have DNA results which indicate that they have a common
ancestor who
lived since surnames have been in use. We call this ancestor Adam (no
connection with the Biblical Adam). We have compelling evidence that
Adam
lived before 1600 AD and after 1200 AD. The location is not certain
but we
are working on the hypothesis that he lived in Scotland near the
western end
of the border with England. Actually we have pretty good reason to
believe
that Adam lived in a valley called Eskdale. Conclusions derived from
these
DNA results always have some uncertainty just because of the statistical
nature of the mutations. There is very little uncertainty that Adam
was real
and the ancestor of the large number of Beattys we call Family Group
01. I
think it very likely that you are a descendant of Adam, and therefore
the
other members of Group 01 are your cousins.
I have entered the haplotype of Adam into Ysearch as record 7GX6B. At 37
markers you have 3 mismatches. In the time since Adam we expect a few
mutations and 3 is not a large number. But there is another twist to the
plot. The mismatches are at DYS 389-2 and the two CDY markers. We
have many
descendants of Adam who share your 31 value at 389-2. This is a
rather rare
value and we conclude that this group is the result of a mutation since
Adam, but still rather far in the past. We call the first Beatty to
receive
this mutation "Charlton", and his descendants are the Charlton
Branch. The
men in the Charlton branch tend to have elevated values at CDY and
you match
exactly 3 of them at 37 markers. Put another way your 37-marker
haplotype
exactly matches Charlton's. This means that you are almost certainly a
descendant of Charlton as well as Adam.
When and where Charlton lived is not clear. Many of his descendants
are in
what we call Lineage-2. These lineages are based on paper-trail
genealogy,
and the results are available at :
http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~bp2000/main.htm . BP2000 is a
Beatty
research cooperative, and the lineage numbers are well past 500. L-2 is
mainly Tennessee Beatys and most of them are in the Charlton Branch.
Further
research has divided L-2 into 6 branches and I hope someone will
offer to
help you determine which you are in. Information on the DNA Project is
available at www.BeattyDNA.org. Our best guess
is that Charlton lived in Ireland before 1700.
We have an unusually talented and helpful batch of Beattys. I put
most of my time into one aspect or another of the DNA analysis.
Others are
skilled at working the libraries and archives.
I hope you are pleased at the prospect that you had a Beatty ancestor.
--Earl
Wayne's memory was ignited, and he wrote 11 Jan 09:
I have no doubt now that my gggrandfather was a Beaty from our
testing. I have remembered . . . my aunt Viola Conley told me years
ago that my Great Aunt Sarah Bookout /Conley-- D/o -William Elvis ,
told her that William Elvis was sired by a Beaty or Beatty as she
spelled it . Wow its something that information can be found after so
many years.
So Wayne's test has given him a gggrandfather, an immigrant
ancestor, and a line of Beaty/Beattie forefathers in Scotland. He is
soundly a Bookout and has a Beaty affiliation as well.
.............................................................................................................
Our fourth test, that of Jed Gentry Bookout, proves that Joseph Bookout 2 is the brother of John and Marmaduke,, most probably with Joseph 1 as their most recent common ancestor.
David W. Brown, our veteran mentor, astutely observed on 11 Dec 2008:
There are a couple things to note in comparing the closely matching results of Jed Gentry Bookout (>Joseph 2), Marvid David Bookout (>John), and Henry Wade Bookout (>Marmaduke).
First, you have now established the entire 37 marker Y-DNA Haplotype of Joseph Sr. It turns out that Jed still carries the same 37, while Henry and Marvin have one mutation each somewhere in your lines.
That is clear because at each and every marker descendants of at least two different sons of Joseph 1 match perfectly. The descendant that always matches one or the other of the two is Jed
At some point in Henry's line down from Marmaduke, Loci CDYb mutated from 39 to 40.
Likewise, at some point in Marvin's line down from John, Loci DYS 447 mutated from 25 to 24.
We have no idea in what generation it happened, BUT:
This means that any Bookout in the future that has 40 at CDYb must be descended from Marmaduke.
Also, any Bookout in the future that has 24 at DYS 447 is descended from John.
Further, however, a Bookout may STILL test 39 at Loci CDYb and be from Marmaduke. This is because we do not know where in the line of descent from Marmaduke the change from 39 to 40 occurred.
And further, a Bookout may STILL test 25 at Loci DYS 447 and be from John. This is because we
do not know where in the line of descent from John the change from 25 to 24 occurred.
(Very extensive tests along the lines of John and Marmaduke could identify where these changes occurred. This point is only made to suggest a description of the process of change; it is not meant to suggest something that would be either practical or useful.)
Three tests are in. The tests of these individuals have paper trails to Charles, John, and Marmaduke Bookout, respectively. It is probable that their common ancestor is Joseph 1 Bookout, c 1735, of Prince George's Co., MD or of Loudoun Co, VA Joseph 1, but this is not a proven fact.
The tests show that all three individuals are located on the same, late, west European "branch" of the Human Family Tree. Their "branch" (or "Haplogroup") is indicated by the technical name "R1b1b2," which originated about 25,000 years ago.
From top left, on the top horizontal row of the reports are listed 37 "markers."
A "marker" is a particular location (locus) or place on the Y-DNA chromosome.
(Recall that the "Y" chromosome determines whether an individual is a man ("XY") or a woman ("XX").
On the top horizontal row the "markers" are called by their technical names, D(NA) "Y"(-chromosome) S(egment)s or DYS#s. These "Segments" or "markers" have shown by experimentation to be significant in characterizing a person's Y-DNA. For example the first DYS# is 393. Arbitrary, but no more so than we would say, Route 58, which pins down a particular road in Riverhead, NY.
The "numbers" under the "markers"--in the 2nd horizontal row of results--indicate how one individual's Y-DNA differs from another person's Y-DNA at a particular "marker."
The "numbers" refer to "alternatives" (alleles) in how many times a sequence of certain chemicals known as A, T, C, and G are "repeated" in a particular D(NA) "Y"(-chromosome) S(equence), DYS.
For each DYS# a unique number of "repeats"--S(hort) T(andem) R(epeats) or STRs--is copied from father to son back for many generations.
It's like telling one kind of a General from another by the number of "stars" on the shoulder of his uniform.
Note for example, for individuals #2 and #3 whose tests are in, "marker"/DYS# 447 (18th from left) has, respectively, "repeats" of 24 (for individual #2) and then 25 "repeats" (for individual #3):
#1, CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC (24 repeats)
#2, CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC (25 repeats)
This may seem very picky, but it indicates a unit of 1 G(enetic) D(istance) between individuals #2 and #3.
For the same #2 and #3 individuals there is only one more "marker" (DYS# CDY b--35th from left) that displays "alternatives" (alleles) or "repeats" of 30 (for individual #2). and alternatively 40 times (for individual #3):
#2, GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG (39 repeats)
#3, GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG (40 repeats)
This is the 2nd, and last, difference between the 37 "markers" of individuals #2 and #3.
The "repeats" for all the other "markers" are the same for these two individuals.
Thus individuals #2 and #3 are said to have a G(enetic) D(istance), GD, of 2 on their 37
"marker" tests because a total of 2 "markers"/DYS#s 447 and CDYb exhibit "alternative" numbers (alleles) of "repeats" (STRs).
A G(enetic) D(istance) of only 2 on a 37 marker test for 2 individuals with the same surname indicates that STATISTICALLY there is a 99% chance that they have a COMMON ANCESTOR.
It is very important to note that this probability does not PROVE that Joseph 1, of either MD or VA, is their common ancestor. The paper trail is what suggests that. NC Joseph 1 left paper documentation as their common ancestor by naming them in his will.
Now, for practice, in the test results of individual #1, count the number of "repeats" that are different* on the exact same "markers" as individuals #2 and #3.
The differences between the "repeats" of #1 from those of #2 and #3 indicate that--in spite of the fact that #1 has a reliable paper trail leading to the same common ancestor as #2 and #3-- it is STATISTICALLY very improbable that #1 had a common ancestor with #2 and #3 in recordable genealogical time. (If you go all the way back everybody has a common ancestor.)
Individual #1 has the surname Bookout and is a valued member of the Project by adding genetic diversity and by posing a question that the Project needs to answer. Furthermore, " , , , [I]f one has been a part of a particular family’s history and heritage, who are we to deny the reality of that family engagement or who are we to say that the geneticists have it wrong? . . . . [We are] no less interested in those with non-matching DNA who have documentation back to a common ancestor than . . . . in those who have documentation and DNA matching . , , , All these persons are familial descendants and, as individually identified, may or may not be genetic descendants of the common ancestor. And that is OK." **
Once a Bookout, always a Bookout, it doesn't matter whose "jeans" you wear.
_______________________________________________
*Answer: 17
**Donald G. Dickason, "Familial and Genetic Descendancy; Conflict or Complement? A Coonsideration of Seemingly Contradictory Genealogical Conclusions When Comparing Traditional Documentaion and the Results of DNA Testing" (5/10/05), see http://www.isogg.org/fgd.htm.